Goodbye, EU. Hello, the European.

First, I must apologise to you, my core audience, for the month-long break I have taken since my last post and video before my Brexit interviews; I have moved - moved country!  I have come to the beautiful peninsula of Bodrum, home to some of the greatest ancient Greek thinkers and the birthplace of many great ideas which galvanized the development of the West.  If I may digress a little further, this place is renowned for stealing the hearts of its visitors, as it did mine, not least because of its uniquely arresting bays and coves, and dry warmth softened by gentle breezes, but also because of the history of the place, e.g. the ruin of one of the seven ancient wonders of the world - the tomb of Mausolus, from which we derive our word mausoleum.  What is more, Bodrum is the meeting place of the Property and Freedom Society, baby of the greatest Libertarian philosopher of our time, Hans-Hermann Hoppe.  One can see why and I will make it my job to provide you with a first-hand look in good time...

But, to the point at hand: I was not the only one who left Europe, so to speak.  Though I left the territories called European, the United Kingdom left the centralized, protectionist European Union.  Not moments after the votes had been counted in favour of the 'leavers', the threats of economic apocalypse came.  Britain would sink beneath the waves; however, such talk was followed not only by the US, Canadian and especially the German governments saying they want to continue strong trading relationships, but European right-wing parties immediately voiced a desire for similar referendums (N.B. not referenda).  Scotland, which voted with a majority in favour of remaining will now most likely have another referendum as to seceding from the UK, London too would seem as though it would wish to secede as a city-state from the rest of England; on and on the secesssion must go, for this is the way of the West.

There can be no middle-ground between individualism and collectivism and the West, because of the foundations of our cultures and the interaction between this and our biology has led to the favouring of individualism, especially in the Anglo-Dutch world.  Nature presents us with a battlefield over resources and our genes determine overwhelmingly which side we are on - the strong middle and higher classes or, rather, the capitalist class; or those without, who are incentivised to push the irrational slave ethic of socialism, using coercive power to violate the private property rights of those with.  Secession is a victory for the capitalist class, those who choose to recognise private property rights and have no biological incentive to wish them away.  Its logical conclusion is the secession of all indviduals from any coercive power and, as such, would be the greatest thing ever to happen to those less fortunate.  I feel justified in my optimism, the market shall prevail over all unsustainable political projects, and what is the market but the realm of individual choice.  We have seen this week, a huge victory on the side of the market and those who excel in it for the benefit of all.  But, the war is not over.  Wherever we can, we must push for greater secession and dispel the illusion of the benevolence and legitimacy of an untouchable corporate body called 'the state' until all that is left is individual actors, using means to achieve ends, not one of them mysteriously immune from justice.

The battle will be fierce.  Even now exaggerations are made, such as that leave-campaigning politicians lied to coerce voters their way and that they are now backtracking - an easy thing to do when only one side of the story is sought.  The weak-minded are swayed by such propaganda and have suddenly 180'd to hypocritical desires to retrospectively tweak democracy (the god which has failed again but which cannot be directly spoken ill of).  Be sure that the political class will continue to catastrophise and declare Brexit the root of all evil.  We, who want freedom, must be equipped with the facts and be ready to defend this secession and indeed all secession.  We must be the optimists and we must shine a light of truth so that the path to freedom can be made visible to others.  The enemies of freedom will not be merciful when they cast up smoke and mirrors.  Fight on, a new enlightenment and a brighter future await.

Therapy leads to Libertarianism

I had the pleasure of speaking with Dr. Michael Edelstein whose mentor was the great psychologist, Albert Ellis, creator of the original form of Cognitive Behaviour Therapy - Rational Emotive Behaviour Therapy (REBT).  He explained that this became the dominant school of therapy by dispelling the false beliefs people have about themselves, others and the world we find ourselves in.  Ellis was influenced by the ancient Greek Stoics to peel away all the musts, shoulds and oughts we invent in our minds and are taught by our families and cultures.  He explained how he, Eliis, Walter Block and Murray Rothbard would discuss libertarianism over dinner in Brooklyn; what I would give to have been a fly on the wall! 

The most significant thing I learned is that a libertarian outlook on society is directly related to therapy.  Instead of the socialistic idea that some people must do something for celooks at rtain others or the conservative idea that some people must not be allowed to engage activities which harm no one, the libertarian doesn't invent  an ought from an is, but simply looks empirically at his choices and acts on his preference.  If things don't work out as we anticipated, we're not immune from requiring therapy to reassess our expectations and unwanted emotions.  For a simple but powerful form of therapy anyone can do themselves at any time, please read Dr. Edelstein's Three Minute Therapy: Change your thinking, change your life (purchase here).

The Origins of the West in Psychopathy and Testosterone

In my interview with Professor James Fallon, we discuss the similarities of the psychopathic brain and that of libertarians.  He explains that 'psychopath' is a broad description of various combinations of characteristics which are, in turn, dependent on the interaction of 15 different genes.  As such, those we describe as psychopathic are not necessarily sociopathic and dangerous; for example, they could simply be charming, charismatic and witty, like Jim.  He describes the way he empathizes with others as being dependent solely on a part of the top of the brain which is involved in cold, rational thought, thus 'cognitive empathy'.  A 'normal person' would use a combination of this with a part of the underside of the brain which produces emotional empathy.  However, most would predominantly use this emotional side of the brain, genuinely feeling the pain of others.  For someone like Jim, however, he can only ever understand someone else's pain but never 'feels' it himself; his brain comprehends rather than exactly mirrors the emotions of another.  In this way, most people are socialistic to a degree; their emotional thought dominates their rational thought, if their rational brain is engaged significantly at all.  As Jim explains, the 10% of people who are intuitive and highly rational, predominantly use their cognitive brain and tend to be libertarian.

Moreover, the West owes its existence to the higher average levels of psychopathy and testosterone of European peoples.  Jim describes his research on the Indo-Europeans and how these higher levels produced a larger number of 'big men' - the more predatory and dominant wolves amongst the feeble sheep.  As well as a greater focus on individualism, such genes also produced the higher degree of rationalism which Weber described as the unique feature of the western civilization.  This produced the libertarian aristocracies of ancient Europe in which there was no one despot, as developed everwhere else in the world.  Where there was one main leader, he was always a first among equals.  He welcomed competition because he wanted the companionship of other strong men, the prestige and respect he desired more than the control of others.  (See my interview with Ricardo Duchesne on the Indo-European origins of the Faustian spirit of the West)
The oriental despot sought to eradicate all competition and sociopathically control others, producing collectivist tyranny.  However, classical liberal principles, such as the rule of law, have continued to be held up as ideals in the West despite the development of proper states in the form of mediaeval constitutional monarchs. 

Jim concludes, sadly, a libertarian society could not be readily achieved, even in the West, because of the socio-biological obstacle of the irrational thinking of the masses of...well...sheep.  Although, perhaps, as Walter Block suggested, a concentration of intuitive, rational thinkers in one area might allow for the secession of a free, or at least freer, society.  In any case, understanding the genetic factors involved is an important first step.  Simply ignoring the influence of genes and focussing solely on environmental factors, as the environmental determinists do, is dangerous and is only designed to further leftist ideology.  But I'll let Jim explain all that:

RIP Henry Harpending

The brilliant, influential anthropologist, Henry Harpending, sadly died yesterday after being unable to recover from a recent stroke.  He was co-author of the important book, The 10,000 Year Explosion. with the humorous and equally brilliant Gregory Cochran.  Together, they have stood against the goliath of leftist ideology which insists no evolution has occurred in human groups over the past 10,000 years.  Showing that the radical changes in lifestyle brought about by the Neolithic Revolution, particularly by agriculture and state monopolization of violence and domestication of the populace, they have enabled us to answer questions relating to differences in IQ, time preference and other socio-biological differences which create major differences in culture.  Yes, geography is a factor, but Henry described a beautiful dance in which genes, geography and all other significant factors influenced one another.  How sad that those who build on his work are shunned, such as Nicholas Wade's controversial A Troublesome Inheritance, which detonated the foundation of the mainstream and saw that he lost his job as science editor of the New York Times.

These men are no racists.  Henry Harpending was a scientist and cared too much about others and, especially about empirical facts, to let baseless accusations from the magisterium stop him.  He described himself as a bleeding heart libertarian to me and you can still hear him describe both his journey to libertarian thinking and the importance of genetic realism in his talk at the H.L. Mencken Club.  The facts are not to be feared, as they inform our decisions.  Truth and freedom are the friends of peace; its enemies are ignorance and coercion.

RIP Henry.  You were a gent and knightly scientist in an era of PC tenure-seeking.

Patriarchy is Inevitable

I had the great pleasure to interview Steven Goldberg, former chairman of City College of New York's Sociology Department, on the subject of Why Men Rule.  This was a fascinating discussion of how testosterone distinguishes men, most significantly in terms on aggression, which drives them to compete more for those positions which are highly valued in a given society.  We also discussed gender fluidity and gender realism, as well as the ridiculousness of PC culture and those groups who wish the state would hinder or assist the development of patriarchy.

I highly recommend his books - The Inevitability of Patriarchy or the later, updated version, Why Men Rule: A Theory of Male Dominance.

#LibertarianismSoWhite

Why are the majority of Libertarians white men?  Is it a conspiracy?  Actually, there are socio-biological reasons and, if you will give me a moment, it is necessary to flesh them out.  

Co-author of The 10,000 Year Explosion, Gregory Cochran, has commented on the latest data suggesting that Europeans are the 'fusion' of three peoples—blue-eyed, dark-skinned Mesolithic hunter-gatherers, Anatolian farmers, and Indo-Europeans from the Pontic-Caspian Steppe (Southern Russia, basically).  He notes that, in Northern Europe, the Indo-Europeans eradicated the Anatolian farmers.  In the South, they simply imposed their language and swung their weight about but, nevertheless, their nomadic movement (having been the first to domesticate and purpose-breed horses) allowed for those increasingly intelligent peasant farmers, who were tied to the land, to create trade routes.  The mixture of these two peoples formed more K-selective, highly intellectual Greek communities with that new x-factor of individual audacity and the libertarian spirit of the Indo-Europeans (especially in the Ionians).  

It would of course be some time for the nomadic, utterly Indo-European northerners to settle into more bourgeois lifestyles which would eventually create the most peaceful, powerful and prosperous societies, particularly the Dutch/Anglospheric groups who have inevitably come to dominate innovation in the vast majority of human endeavours (see
The Bourgeois Virtues: Ethics for an Age of Commerce by Deirdre McCloskey).  They would possess all that was great about the ancient, mediterranean West but more so - the full-blooded Faustian spirit of the Indo-Europeans and ever-increasing IQ's necessitated by bourgeois K-strategizing, optimized by even harsher winters.  The absence of enough of these socio-biological traits is arguably the reason the Romans did not achieve the Industrial Revolution; possessing them in greater abundance, however, led to societies with high average IQ's, just under East Asians, but with a significantly higher level of testosterone, increasing creativity and tenacity, and creating cultures which socialize towards individualism and competition, particularly against the imposition of authority.  Having a higher percentage of people with these self-asserting and self-affirming traits is what caused the West to recurringly fight against authorities and their centralization.  Indeed, there are too many revolutions, competing bodies and movements to limit the inevitable expansions of the Leviathan State to mention.  The self-empowering ideals of Classical Liberalism only sprouted in the West and thus many white, male Libertarians take this unique socio-biological habitat in which it exists very seriously.
 
This is perhaps the ultimate reason that many Libertarians do not favour open borders; they think it would be better for the cause of liberty to oppose waves of mass immigration by peoples who have  different evolutionary and cultural backgrounds, that is, social environments not favouring the natural development of Classical Liberalism, let alone Libertarianism. Especially when Europe has received unprecedented numbers of peoples from Conservative Muslim areas.  That politico-religious ideology is necessarily opposed to Liberal Islam's favouring of western, liberal political values, regarding Islam as a moderating cultural technology (e.g. the Golden Rule promotes reciprocity).  

But discussion of the Libertarian debate on immigration shall be for another time.  For now, there is no debate as to why Libertarians are mostly white and almost entirely in European-origin countries, and there is absolutely no way that the Oscars are racist.  Neither am I, in case you were thinking of asking...